Solly
Her is a diagram of my module laying on it's side.
Build the frame and attach the top before installing the legs in the corners. The legs will wedge into place tightly and screw them in. I also add leg levelers on the bottom of the legs to even them out. I weigh 160 pounds and can sit in the middle of one of these mocules and it is fine. They are very light weight even though they are made with 2 by 4's. I use Stanley metal bracing to attach them together. Ask the hardware store to show you Stanley corner braces. the straight braces are there also and I typically mount them underneath the table.
RMax
I a 5x9, I should be able to use 22" radius for the outer track and inner track correct?
THE.RRA 5x9 table top layout is a good candidate for an expanded 4x8. Find a 4x8 plan that you like. Expand by A) increasing the radii; 2) adding 6" to 1' of straight to runs between corners; iii) adding a passing track to the main, an additional siding, or another track to the yard.
One of my favorite layouts for this space was originally published in the April1957 Model Railroader. It is a folded dog bone as another prior posted noted. It represents a double track main line climing a hill, with a spur that runs down to service a small town that the main line could not because of the grade. It is a prototypical situation from somewhere on the Pennsy. A variation of the plan is in the 1959 version of the Atlas Customer Line Track Plans for HO Railroads. I am still going to build that one - some day. The only bad thing for your situation is that it uses 18" radius curves that could probably only be relaxed to 22" instead of 24'.
what are you using to tie the two modules together? Would you have a diagram?
cuyama Trainnut500: The Virginian that MMR is doing how would be a great layout for you. If the Original Poster's interests in model railroading are focused on a coal branch in Appalachia, yes, that's a good layout to consider. But for any other interest, not so much.
Trainnut500: The Virginian that MMR is doing how would be a great layout for you.
If the Original Poster's interests in model railroading are focused on a coal branch in Appalachia, yes, that's a good layout to consider.
But for any other interest, not so much.
Wouldn't the basic track plan work for pretty much anything? It's got a basic yard, one major industry, two small industries, and a short branch that runs out on the extension. This is one of the nicest project layouts I've seen in a while.
Milepost 266.2Wouldn't the basic track plan work for pretty much anything?
Not to my mind, but then again I think layout designs should reflect a concept and purpose.
Layouts based on urban industrial switching ...
... look different from layouts that can keep two trains in motion continuously ...
... which look different from layouts that are based on a branchline/shortline with interchange ...
... which look different from layouts designed around coal-hauling in Appalachia (the MR layout) ... and so on.
All of these layouts are HO 4X8s, but the Original Poster will alleviate many of those designs' (and the MR layout's) shortcomings by building whatever he chooses in 5X9.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
The place is a mess at the moment but i am working on it!
Trainnut500The Virginian that MMR is doing how would be a great layout for you.
Since the original poster asked about keeping two curves separated, he may be interested in having the ability for two trains to orbit separately and continuously. In which case MR's Virginian layout is a very poor fit.
If the Original Poster would share more about what he'd like to see from his layout, folks might be able to provide more pertinent advice.
sollyHi, with the first layout, were you using 24" radius on the outside and 22" radius on the inside> Will that be okay on a 5x9 in the case you had a derailment?
Will that be okay on a 5x9 in the case you had a derailment?
Probably not. For most equipment, you'll need more like 2 1/4" to 2 1/2" between concentric curves to avoid side-swiping, and even more separation to avoid a derailment on one track from interfering with the other. It's a bit complicated, but the NMRA's Track Center Standards data sheet S-8 is a good starting point. HO is about halfway down the page.
I have all my module measurements on paper and take them to Lowe's. I gather up the lumber on a cart and take it to the saw. The man cuts the lumber for me and I pre-fit the pieces right there. When I get home I drill the leg holes and put it all together. I have Lowe's do all the cutting. i make the height 30 inches because i like to sit down and watch the trains. This is my current setup I am working on. I have a 10X10 room and very limited space. Getting the things thru the door is the biggest issue.
Saw's in storage and I have just a drill!
RMax1, I was thinking of using a ping pong table, I know its not a perm resolution, but!
I would have liked to make a 5x10 using to 5x5 modules, I just don't have the tools or know how.
I have really like the 2X4 ft. Module system that I am building! Here are the advantages to it. If you want 5X9ft. you can add a center section between the modules to make 5ft. This can be done in 2ft. by 1ft section, By breaking the system up it makes it easier to get thru doors and is a lot lighter. You can also make it just about any width and length. Point to point, island loop or both are possible. My original layout was 6x12 and never again.
hi Solly,
you could buy the January MR magazine.
Or have a look on Byron Henderson's awesome website.
Smile
Paul
Ulrich., could you please send me a copy of the layout, or do you have a link to it?
Thanks
Solly,
the Virginian is MR´s current project layout, the introductory feature is in the January 2012 copy.
It is a 4 by 8 layout designed for operation, which you could easily adapt to fit a 5 by 9 table.
Virginian? not sure where that is located, is their a parts list?
Thanks in advance
The Virginian that MMR is doing how would be a great layout for you.
Hi, with the first layout, were you using 24" radius on the outside and 22" radius on the inside>
Will that be okay on a 5x9 in the case you had a derailment? I know this is an old thread.
hi all,
again a first posting almost two years old. Paul
hi,
As you can see pretty well Doc has no space to do anything at the outside of the loop. Why do you think John Armstrong advised us to chose a radius that leaves 4 inches of space on both sides of the 180 degree turn? So when your layout is 5 feet wide your radius can be 26". When you want to add a station you will need a lot of length. My thinking is a layout should be at least 5 squares long and 2.5 squares wide. ( a square = radius + 4" in HO)
Question why is the 5 feet width of your layout that important to you?
Stix, I set up an under tree oval with UniTrack (#240 curves which are 28in); the rug is 5x9; the Con-Cor Burlington Zephyr is rated for 22in curves
Co-owner of the proposed CT River Valley RR (HO scale) http://home.comcast.net/~docinct/CTRiverValleyRR/
PowhatanFan After a lot of thought, I decided to go with HO with 22" min radius. I am planning a 5x9 or 5x10.
After a lot of thought, I decided to go with HO with 22" min radius. I am planning a 5x9 or 5x10.
I'd reconsider the min radius. 22" is pretty sharp in HO, some larger engines (like a BLI 2-10-4) and passenger cars (like Walthers cars) have a 24" min radius. Plus the larger the radius of the curves, the better everything is going to look and operate. Many HO modellers shoot for a 30" min radius if possible. You can't quite do that in 60" (five feet) but you can get up around 26-7-8" radius. Kato Unitrack has track with roadbed that comes in 24" and 26-3/8" radius. I'd take a look at that, especially if you're fairly new to tracklaying and such. BTW I'd try to stick with No.6 turnouts if possible.
I know it looks like a big min radius is going to cut down what you can squeeze into the space, but in the long run it's going to look and work better, and open up opportunities to use larger equipment down the road.
Somebody made the suggestion of looking at 4x8 HO plans and scaling them up to allow for the larger space, I like that idea especially if you expand the min radius of the designs.
Christopher62Anybody know of any good layout plans for an HO scale 5x9 island-type table top layout.
Back to original post....
Take a look at the "peanut shaped layout' that ChrisNH put up vs. some of the others. Avoid the oval with sides parallel to the table edge.
With 24in radius curves you have room for a passing track or staging area (behind a backdrop). As was said above, any of the 4x8 plans can be enlarged to fit a 5x9 space. Also 2x4ft or 30x54in N-scale designs can be scaled up to 5x9 rather easily. In which case check out Mike's Small Track Plans
hi OP and Powhatten fan'
The plans by Pcarrell are drawn with RTS. And you can count the tracks. Every time an other piece of track is used you see a white dot.
In the lower two designs the outer track has a 22"radius, four pieces are needed for a 90 degree turn. The inner track uses only three pieces and has a 18" radius; you can see a lot of double dots here, witch means the designer used very short pieces of straights in between to create something that appears to be a 19.5 inch "radius". The upper pike uses 24"and 22" radii and has some space left at the outside.
Along the main he used #4 switches, in the yard #6's. A strange choice. A #4 switch is about 8 inch long a #6 will take almost a foot.
All pikes are lacking staging. After a while you get tired seeing the very same trains appearing every three seconds. To create some time and space to do a bit of switching it would be nice to have tracks were a train can be parked temporarily. So we are back into the footprint debate. Finding a way now, how to add staging , is easyer then doing it after the build.
http://www.layoutvision.com/id28.html
http://www.layoutvision.com/id47.html
All pikes are a bit track heavy imho; so I would leave the turntable out. The tracks coming from the TT are very short, so are the roundhouse tracks. And you can't use the whole length of these tracks, due to clearence problems. The steamers or other engines using the TT will be restricted in length to 6 or maybe 7 inches. The engine escape track at the very end of the yard has the same "length", a lot of other spurs too. (Pcarrall must have missed Christopher's first remark he wanted to run modern diesels)
The best part is the interchange track in the lower right corner; this track should be kept at all times.
pcarrellno grades on the layout so the trackwork would be easier for a beginner.
The trackwork will be the same, it is the benchwork that is more complicated.
Seems to me some tinkering with the plan is still to be done. The best thing you can do is to post a drawing of the space you have, like Andy Sperandeo did in 102 Realistic Track Plans. This will make it possible to think about a footprint with staging.
SteinJr had a great plan for a 5x9 in another thread, you can ask him to give you a copy.
I really like the designs that Phillip listed here. It lloks like these were done with
some form of track planning software. How can I tell what tracks to use? I don;t have anything
and need to go buy them. Suggestions?
Good suggstions all around! And while I have to agree that a 5x9 island may not be the best use of space, sometimes there are other factors involved that make it more attractive.
Some time back I helped another modeler with a 5x9 HO plan and we came up with a couple of variations on the same basic premis. He wanted no grades on the layout so the trackwork would be easier for a beginner. He also wanted a scenic divider to fit two scenes into the layout. Larger curves were also a concern. Lastly, he wanted a modest yard. What we ended up with had all of that plus a connection to the outside world (a short interchange track) which could be a track for future expantion. They also had a RIP (stands for "Repair In Place".....it's the short sidings next to the turntable......an yes, they still use turntables today with diesels) track to help add diversity to operations.
See if these might work, or maybe just give you some ideas.........
(Click to enlarge)
Personally, I liked the first one with the switchback.
shayfan84325 wrote: R.T.,You make good points all the way around. My layout is a folded loop to point (4 X 13 feet), but I used a 2-loop helix to get to the upper level (the helix is partly in a tunnel and partly on two concentric curved trestles - an engineering marvel even in HO scale).
R.T.,
You make good points all the way around. My layout is a folded loop to point (4 X 13 feet), but I used a 2-loop helix to get to the upper level (the helix is partly in a tunnel and partly on two concentric curved trestles - an engineering marvel even in HO scale).
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.